Chapter 75 <would rather not>

What I’m talking about here is not the general meaning of Ning Yao Wu, but specifically referring to the “Ning Yao Wu” that was hyped up by the Gang of Four during the Cultural Revolution. They were selling this formula everywhere. For example: I would rather have the grass of socialism than the seedlings of capitalism; prefer the low speed of socialism to the high speed of capitalism; prefer the lateness of socialism to the punctuality of revisionism; Or, not a cultured exploiter, spiritual aristocrat, etc. Why did the Gang of Four try their best to promote these things?Are they correct? From a logical point of view, the formula of preferring or not is an omitted discursive reasoning.The so-called discursive reasoning is that the major premise is a disjunctive judgment, the minor premise affirms or denies a part of the major premise, and the conclusion negates or affirms the other part of the major premise.We use A and B to denote the two optional parts respectively, then the above formula is rather A than B, which omits a major premise of the optional: either A or B.

Reverting this ellipsis back to its full form is: Either A, or B (major premise); Don't A (minor premise); Therefore, B (conclusion) is required. The minor premise negates an optional component A of the major premise, and the conclusion affirms another optional component B, which is called negative-affirmative selective reasoning. There is a rule in disjunctive reasoning: in order to obtain a reliable conclusion through negation and affirmation, the disjunctive part of the disjunctive premise must be exhaustive, that is, all the possibilities of the situation must be enumerated.Otherwise, you will make the mistake of choosing endless words and limbs.Now let’s take the example of preferring socialist grass to capitalist seedlings and preferring an uneducated laborer to an educated exploiter and spiritual aristocracy to make a brief analysis.

First of all, it is absurd to divide grass and seedlings into socialist and capitalist, because there is no question of surname socialism or capitalism between the two; Sex is not two, but four.That is: either the grass of socialism, or the seedlings of socialism, or the grass of capitalism, or the seedlings of capitalism. The Gang of Four deliberately cut off the seedlings of socialism and forced people to choose only two possibilities. The road of capitalism; if you choose socialism, you must get grass.This actually beautifies capitalism and vilifies socialism. Again, we would rather have an uneducated laborer than an educated exploiter or spiritual aristocrat. They deliberately hide the choice of an educated laborer with socialist consciousness that we need, and only take There are two possibilities for people to choose, and the result must be: if you cultivate educated talents through education and technology, you will cultivate exploiters and spiritual aristocrats; if you want laborers, you must be uneducated people.This actually beautifies the exploiters and vilifies the laborers.

Everything else is better or worse.From a logical analysis, the sophistry reasoning of the gang of four who would rather not have it is called the amputation sophistry.